Software doesn’t take up physical space, so it should be free. After all, it isn’t real. It isn’t tangible. It doesn’t exist in a material sense, therefore it doesn’t cost anything to make and produce. Right?

Okay, not everyone actually thinks like this, but listen to the complaints that users tend to have about mobile software and you’ll start to see a pattern: they want everything to be perfect, everything to be available right now, and everything to be free.

But software takes time, energy, and expertise to develop and maintain — and developers deserve to be compensated for that, especially if making apps is what they do for a living. But how does that affect you, the end user? A great deal more than you might think, especially with the prevalence of freemium business models.

1. Direct Purchases

You can think of direct purchases as the digital equivalent of how games on cartridges and CDs used to be work. You buy a game, and that’s it. The entire experience is yours and you can rest easy knowing no part of the game is missing, that no part is designed to milk more money out of you.

But direct purchases are somewhat uncommon in the mobile world. Why? Because they’re less friendly to casual users. The upfront cost can be a deterrent when you don’t know whether you will like a particular app, whereas a free app can be tested and uninstalled if it’s no good without any risk.

To get around this, developers often release free versions that contain a sample of the experience. This can be a lot of work for developers because it involves maintaining two copies of the app and keeping both in working order.

2. Microtransactions

In the early days of desktop computers, a common way of selling software consisted of letting users download a program and, after a few days passed or they played through a few levels, asking them to pay to continue. Back then we called this shareware. Now it’s morphed into microtransactions.

Here’s the great thing about microtransactions: you only have to pay for the parts of the app or game that you plan to use. For example, if you want a particular level pack, you can buy it while ignoring the other level packs you don’t want. This could save you money in some cases.

Another approach to microtransactions is to get people to exchange their real money for virtual currency. This virtual currency usually appears in games, and, at its best, offers a way to purchase extra content that isn’t essential or unlock everything without having to play through the old-fashioned way.

The sad thing about microtransactions is that they usually impact gameplay in a negative way. Waiting for crops to grow in Harvest Moon, a farming sim without any microtransactions, only takes a few moments. In Farmville, the process can take hours — unless you buy an item that makes crops appear instantly.

Here’s another example: in racing games, it’s common to expend “fuel” every time you go on a race, and this fuel recharges slowly over time. Now you have to wait until you have enough fuel before you can race again — unless you pay a few bucks to instantly recharge and get back on the road right away.

In the video below, Nerd Cubed articulates (using very colorful language) the ways implementing virtual currency can negatively impact the design of a game:

Human psychology encourages this type of game. Being “free” offers a low barrier to entry, and the simple controls make it easy to keep playing. But once we’re hooked, it can be hard to walk away when spending a few bucks will let us continue.

And in those moments when we do manage to stop thinking about playing, some games deploy notifications that entice us back in with the promise of bonus virtual money. If you enjoy the game, how can you turn that down?

3. Advertisements

Ads are everywhere. They interrupt television shows, cut into magazine stories, and disrupt music on radio stations. A naive person might have once thought that ads would never follow to the smartphone, but they’ve obviously been proven wrong.

The unfortunate truth is that advertisements are one of the easiest and most painless ways for mobile app developers to earn money for their hard work. They also offer you the ability to download apps for free. In that sense, they’re a win-win.

Ads can take many forms, the most familiar being the banners that line the tops and bottoms of your screen. These banners can advertise websites, services, or other apps, and will traditionally open links when tapped. More recently, banners will expand to fill the screen once tapped.

Fullscreen ads typically pop-up during downtime, such as between levels in a mobile game or between songs in a music player. Some are static images, others have animations, but some are more advanced, like playable game demos that send you to the Play Store.

The most intrusive of all are video ads. These suck up mobile data and blast you with audio, which can result in awkward situations at the worst of times.

Of course, there’s a trade off. If users are put off by the number of ads, then they’ll uninstall the app and the developer won’t bring in as much revenue. So in some sense, you can still vote with your wallet. You just have to be willing to pull the Uninstall trigger.

Which Method Do You Prefer?

Since code doesn’t write itself, we’re always going to have to wrestle with how creators get compensated for their time.

I’m personally a fan of buying a game outright from the beginning. Whether a developer wants to ask for $5, $10, or $20 — that’s all fine. I’ll browse the screenshots, read a few reviews, and make a judgment call the same way I’ve done for years.

But I’ve heard from gamers who enjoy the amount of gaming they can do for free these days. Some don’t mind waiting the long stretches of time that are necessary to avoid making IAPs. Similarly, ads completely ruin the experience for me but I’ve watched as other people seem not to notice them at all.

Ultimately, we all have a say in how we like to acquire software. How do you feel about these different approaches to the way developers monetize, and as a result, design their apps? Sound off in the comments below!

"You can think of direct purchases as the digital equivalent of how games on cartridges and CDs used to be work. You buy a game, and that’s it. The entire experience is yours and you can rest easy knowing no part of the game is missing, that no part is designed to milk more money out of you."

I feel the last sentence is incorrect and definitely outdated. Now a days, we pay up to $65.00 dollars to buy what we think is a full game for our gaming systems. But, in order to get full benefit of the game, you have to pay for yearly memberships and on top of that they keep adding new content for the games. Example "Call of Duty", they keep coming out with new maps, weapons, power ups, characters etc.. easily you can end up pay way over $100.00.........It can be a never ending investment.

I like ad-supported trials for software that needs to offer a paid ad-free version. I really dislike having an app that requires ad viewing and has no option to remove ads except for me to block stuff with the hosts file... which I will do if I can't pay $2, $3 or $5 to get rid of them any other way because seeing ads on anything other than the most temporary basis offends me.

Of course, I'm also a big fan of the sorts of open-source utilities one might find on Fdroid. Not every application needs to be updated or supported with advertising in the first place.

Bertel both earned a college degree (in the humanities) and built a career using Linux-powered laptops. Now he uses his education and life experience to question the ethical decisions behind today's technology. He advocates the use of free software and believes computing should be accessible to all regardless of economic…